INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 15/4-388/14 BETWEEN YASMIN BINTI HARON AND EXTOL CORPORATION (M) SDN. BHD. AWARD NO: 342 OF 2017

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 15/4-388/14 BETWEEN YASMIN BINTI HARON AND EXTOL CORPORATION (M) SDN. BHD. AWARD NO: 342 OF 2017"

Transcription

1 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 15/4-388/14 BETWEEN YASMIN BINTI HARON AND EXTOL CORPORATION (M) SDN. BHD. AWARD NO: 342 OF 2017 Before : Y.A. PUAN REIHANA BTE ABD.RAZAK CHAIRMAN (SITTING ALONE) Venue : INDUSTRIAL COURT, KUALA LUMPUR Date of Reference: Dates of Mention : , , , , , , , , , , , Dates of Hearing : , , Representation : Mr. Anthony Gomez Messrs Gomez & Associates Counsel for the Claimant. Mr. Ringo Low and Ms. CC Choy Messrs Ringo Low & Associates Counsel for the Company. 1

2 REFERENCE: 1. The parties to the dispute are YASMIN BINTI HARON ( the Claimant ) and EXTOL CORPORATION (M) SDN. BHD.( the Company ). This case is a reference under Section 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967, arising from the dismissal of YASMIN BINTI HARON ( the Claimant ) by EXTOL CORPORATION (M) SDN. BHD. ( the Company ). AWARD 2. The Ministerial reference in this case required the Court to hear and determine the Claimant s complaint of dismissal by the Company on BRIEF FACTS 3. The Claimant commenced employment with the Company on as Assistant Business Manager in the Business Development Unit of the Company with a salary of RM RM5, per month. The Claimant was put on probation for six (6) months commencing vide the Company's offer of letter of employment dated [COB-1 pages 1 to 5 - Letter of Appointment) 2

3 4. The Claimant s probation was extended for another 3 months with effect from to vide letter dated [COB-1 page 17 - First Probation Extension]. 5. Vide letter dated entitled Termination Letter, the Company wrote to the Claimant informing her that her employment with the Company is terminated with effect from [COB-1 page 39 - Termination Letter] 6. The Claimant s contended that the termination of her service by the Company was without just cause or excuse and was with mala fide motives contrary to the principles of equity, good conscience and natural justice. 7. The Company on the other hand contended that the Claimant was not confirmed due to her unsatisfactory performance and also that the Claimant is not suitable for the position with the Company. COMPANY S CASE 8. The Company's case is as stated in its Statement-in-Reply dated The Claimant commenced employment with the Company on as Assistant Business Manager in the Business Development Unit, with a monthly salary of RM 4, and reporting to the Head of Department of the Business Development of the Company. The Claimant s scopes of work is been described in the Letter of Appointment dated [COB-1 page 5 Job Description] 3

4 9. The Claimant s probation period of 6 months commenced on Vide letter dated , the Company then extended the period of probation of the Claimant for another 3 months from to on the grounds that the Claimant did not achieved her sales performance especially to explore and secure new business opportunities and that the Claimant also did not demonstrate the ability to meet the job expectations. [COB-1 page 17 - First Probation Extension] 10. Pursuant to the extension of the probation period, the Company conducted a Counseling and Performance Evaluation on the Claimant on and on where the Claimant was cautioned about her unsatisfactory performance and failure to meet sales targets. The Claimant was also advised to improve her job performance which will be reviewed in July On , the Company conducted another Performance Evaluation on the Claimant and also was considered unsatisfactory with no improvement in her job performance at all. 12. By letter dated , the Company terminated the contract of employment of the Claimant as a probationary employee with effect from [COB-1 page 39 - Termination Letter] 4

5 CLAIMANT S CASE 13. The Claimant s case is as stated in her Statement of Case dated The Claimant avers that as Assistant Business Manager in the Business Development Unit, her primary job responsibility were to assist BDM in Account/Client Management, to retain existing client, explore new business opportunity and to help out on preparing proposals tenders and quotations. 14. The Claimant avers that she was never told of any sales target to be achieved upon her appointment as Assistant Business Manager neither did anyone raised the issue of any sales to be achieved during her probationary period. 15. The Claimant avers that as she was about to complete her probationary service, the Company, without any prior notice, extended her probation on for another 3 months with effect from on the grounds that she did not achieved her sales on exploring and securing new business opportunities and also that she have not demonstrated her ability as the Assistant Business Manager. 16. The Claimant contended that her Head of Department carried out Performance Review and Development and gave a positive report because her overall performance evaluation was more than satisfactory. 5

6 17. The Claimant further avers that on , the Company maliciously issued a show cause letter to the Claimant accusing the Claimant of having gone for lunch early and returned late to office on [CLB-1 page 13 - show cause letter] 18. The Claimant also avers that despite of a positive satisfactory report on her overall performance given by her superior, the company issued a warning letter dated to the Claimant alleging her being a nonperformer. [COB-1 page 28 - warning letter] 19. The Claimant further avers that the Company went on issuing on her another warning letter dated alleging her for being late for the company training sessions. [COB-1 page 38 - Warning letter - Late For Training Without Prior Intimation] 20. The Claimant contents that the Company was maliciously and extremely prejudice in dismissing her vide letter dated and therefore her summary dismissal was unjust and unlawful. THE LAW AND BURDEN OF PROOF 21. In the often cited case of WONG CHEE HONG V. CATHAY ORGANISATION (M) SDN. BHD [1988] 1 CLJ (Rep) 298 at page 302, the duty of the Industrial Court was stated by his Lordship Salleh Abbas LP as: 6

7 When the Industrial Court is dealing with a reference under section 20, the first thing that the Court will have to do is to ask itself a question whether there was a dismissal, and if so, whether it was with or without just cause or excuse. 22. It is trite law that the Company bears the burden to prove that the Claimant had committed the alleged misconduct and that the misconduct warrants the Claimant's dismissal. In IREKA CONSTRUCTION BERHAD V CHANTIRAVATHAN SUBRAMANIAM JAMES [1995] 2 ILR 11 (Award No. 245 of 1995) it was stated as follows: It is the basic principle of industrial jurisprudence that in a dismissal case, the employer must produce convincing evidence that the workman committed that offence of which the workman is alleged to have been dismissed. The burden of proof is on the employer to prove that he has just cause or excuse for taking the decision to impose the disciplinary measure of dismissal upon the employee. The just cause must be, either a misconduct, negligence or poor performance based on the case. 23. The Company needs only to prove misconduct justifying the dismissal or termination on a balance of probabilities (see TELEKOM MALAYSIA KAWASAN UTARA V KRISHNAN KUTTY A/L SANGUNI NAIR & ANOR [2002] 3 CLJ Consequently, as the dismissal of the Claimant by the Company is not disputed, this Court will next proceed to consider the propriety of the Claimant s termination, that is, it was for just cause or excuse. 7

8 25. Since the Claimant is a probationer, it must be stated at the outset that it is an entrenched rule of industrial jurisprudence that a probationer has no substantive right of tenure to hold the position nor does he hold a lien upon the post beyond the agreed contractual probationary period. In the case of EQUATORIAL TIMBER MOULDING SDN. BHD. KUCHING V. JOHN MICHAEL CROSSKEY, KUCHING [1986] 2 ILR 1666 (Award No. 387 of 1986) where the Industrial Court stated the principles as follows: Such an employee has no substantive right to hold the post. He holds no lien on the post. He is on trial to prove his fitness for the post for which he offers his services. His character, suitability and capacity as an employee is to be tested during the probationary period and his employment on probation comes to an end if during or at the end of the probation period he is found to be unsuitable and his employer can terminate his probation by virtue or otherwise as provided in the terms of appointment. There are also an abundance of authorities to support the view that an employer has a contractual right to terminate the services of a probationer without notice and without assigning any reasons whatsoever However, when the validity of such a termination is challenged, the Court must be satisfied that such termination was a bona fide exercise of the power conferred by the contract. And where there is a suspicion of unfair labour practice, then the Court will not hesitate to interfere with the termination and the employee should be afforded proper relief. 8

9 26. In the Court of Appeal's case of KHALIAH ABBAS V. PESAKA CAPITAL CORPORATION SDN BHD [1997] 3 CLJ 827, it was stated that an employee on probation enjoys the same rights as a permanent or confirmed employee and his services cannot be terminated without just cause or excuse. His Lordship Shaik Daud Ismail JCA at page 831 said as follows: It is our view that an employee on probation enjoys the same right as a permanent or confirmed employee and his or her services cannot be terminated without just cause or excuse. The requirement of bona fide is essential in the dismissal of an employee on probation but if the dismissal or termination is found to be a colourable exercise of the power to dismiss or as a result of discrimination or unfair labour practice, the Industrial Court has the jurisdiction to interfere and to set aside such dismissal. 27. In the case of DORSETT REGENCY HOTEL (M) SDN. BHD. V. ANDREW JAYADASS JAMES AMBROSE [2003] 2 ILR 740 at page 751 the learned Chairman analysed the meaning of the above passage of the Court of Appeal in relation to a reference under section 20(3) of the Act and the status of a probationer as follows: However Khaliah s case does not expound the substantive law pertaining to a probationer but relates to the specific question that if a probationer is to be terminated, it should be within the general purview of s. 20(3) of the Act in that it should not be without just cause and excuse. Nevertheless, this court must be mindful that there is an intrinsic and material distinction between employees under probation and confirmed permanent employees.. In the case of VIKAY TECHNOLOGY SDN. BHD. V. ANG 9

10 ENG SEW [1993] 1 ILR 90 at p. 95 the learned chairman referred to a passage in Malhotra's book "The Law of Industrial Disputes" (11th Edn.[sic] at p. 224) which reads as follows: "It is well settled law that at the end of the probationary period, it is open to the employer to continue the employee in his service or not in his discretion, otherwise the distinction between probationary employment and permanent employment will be wiped out. Even if on the expiry of the probationary period the work of the employee is satisfactory, it does not confer any right on [him] to be confirmed." [Emphasis added] At the High Court in HARTALEGA SDN. BHD. V SHAMSUL HISHAM MOHD AINI [2004] 3 CLJ 257 Wan Afrah JC (as Her Ladyship then was) approved the interpretation of KHALIAH BTE ABBAS V PESAKA CAPITAL CORPORATION SDN. BHD. (supra) by the learned Chairman in DORSETT REGENCY HOTEL (M) SDN. BHD. V ANDREW JAYADAS JAMES AMBROSE (supra). The Court in HARTALEGA'S case further held that: There should be a distinction between a probationer and a confirmed employee. Merely bringing the probationer within the ambit of s. 20 of the Act does not automatically imply that the probationer is elevated to the status of a confirmed employee. This was not the intention of the legislature in enacting s. 20(3) of the Act Both parties had agreed that it was conditional for a probationer to perform his functions to the satisfaction of his 10

11 employer. Failure to do so would render the probationer liable to be dismissed, save that such a decision must not be capricious or arbitrary.". 28. An employee on probation cannot expect to be accorded with the same status, rights or privileges as a permanent/confirmed employee. The correct test to be applied in relation to the decision of an employer to dismiss a probationary employee is that the decision must be bona fide and not one that is capricious or arbitrary. The bona fide test also equally applies for any extension of a probationary period if genuinely warranted by circumstances of the case. EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE AND FINDINGS OF COURT 29. The Claimant was appointed as an Assistant Business Manager and to be placed under a six (6) months probationary period with the terms as set out in the Letter of Appointment to which the Claimant had acknowledged and accepted. Being appointed as an Assistant Business Manager, it was not disputed by the Claimant that achieving sales target set by the Company was in the Claimant s job description as if was clearly set out in the Letter of Appointment and that the Claimant had accepted and aware about it. 30. The Court therefore finds that the Claimant s averment in her Statement Of Case that she was never told of any sales target to be achieved upon her appointment as Assistant Business Manager and that neither did anyone raised the issue of any sales to be achieved during her 11

12 probationary period is just a mere assertions of the Claimant trying to plead ignorance of what was expected from her by the Company in relation to the sales target that she have to achieve. 31. In the case of ROBERT JOHN REEVES V. MENTERI SUMBER MANUSIA MALAYSIA & ANOR [2000] 1 CLJ 180 AT PAGE 192;... it cannot be disputed that the applicant was holding a senior management position and he was expected to know the standard of job performance required of him. He therefore cannot plead or seek refuge in his purported ignorance of what was expected from him by the 2nd respondent. This is a trite principle of Employment Law in cases concerning poor performance of senior employees. 32. It is also to be noted that the Claimant agreed and confirmed during cross examination by counsel for the Company that her immediate superior one Ms. Yan Leong and the Claimant had had a meeting to discuss the content of the Performance Evaluation No.1 which included the Sales Target as stated in Part II Items 4 & 5 and Part III Items 4 & 5 of the Performance Evaluation No.1: Counsel: Do you agree what you have discussed regarding the Performance Evaluation with Yan Leong were all set out in page 10 to page 15 of COB1? Claimant: Yes. 12

13 33. The Performance Evaluation No.1 is the documentary evidence to show that the sales targets were expressly mentioned in her performance evaluation forms too. [COB-1 page 13] 34. Apart from just a mere assertions by the Claimant, there was no other evidence to support that the Claimant had no knowledge about the requirement to achieve sales targets in order to be confirmed on her job. 35. From the evidence adduced, the Claimant also did not at any point of time during her probation period objected nor seek any clarification from the Company or anyone about her sales targets when the Company extended her probationary period for another 3 months by giving one of the reason for the extension was that she did not achieved her sales targets set by the Company. 36. The Claimant also acknowledged the receipt of the Probation Extension Letter dated without any protest not even to her immediate superior one Ms Yan Leong whom she claimed had given her positive evaluation for her to be confirmed. [COB-1 page 17] 37. The Claimant could have called her immediate superior the said Ms. Yan Leong to confirm that she gave the Claimant positive evaluation for her confirmation on the post and support Claimant s allegation that Company was mala fide motivated for not confirming the Claimant. 13

14 38. The Claimant did not called the said Ms. Yan Leong since the said Ms. Yan Leong too had left the Company. However during crossexamination, the Claimant was asked if she is still in contact with Ms. Yan Leong, to which she answered, Yes, she is my immediate supervisor in the new Company, KPMG Management and Risk Consulting Sdn. Bhd, where I am working in now. 39. In the case of FAKIR ABDUL JALIL BIN PAKIR MOHAMED V. SHELL REFINERY CO. BHD. (Award of 20 of 1974) the Court states: The dictionary meaning of probation is given as the testing of conduct or character of a person and a probationer is one who is on trial or in a state to give proof of certain qualifications for a place or state. The idea of probation in all cases of services contracts is, therefore, a testing of the character and capabilities of the servant on the employer's side, and also a testing of the conditions of service on the employee's part. The period of probation in a service contract can, therefore, be taken as a communication by the employer that in case the employee proves himself, within the period of probation, to the satisfaction of the employer, that he (the probationer) is a fit and proper person to perform the duties for which he has offered his services, the probationer would be entitled to be confirmed or taken in on a permanent basis. The appointment of a person on probation is, therefore, tentative and dependent on the employer's satisfaction as to his suitability. [Emphasis Added] 14

15 40. In the present case, despite being given the opportunities to improve her performance and change her work attitude, evidence was shown in Court that the Claimant still failed to achieve the sales targets set by the Company and also failed to demonstrate her suitability of holding the position as expected by the Company. The Company was completely dissatisfied with the Claimant s work attitude and dismissed the Claimant 41. The Company being dissatisfied with the Claimant s work attitude the Company had to issue a warning letter dated to the Claimant requiring her to improve her work performance and to submit her daily sales activities to her superior Ms. Yan Leong effective [COB-1 page 28] 42. The Claimant was also during her probationary period issued with a show cause letter dated by the Company of having gone for lunch early and returned late to office on [CLB-1 page 43] 43. It was also evidence adduced in the court and was not disputed by the Claimant that while still in the extended period of probation, the Claimant was issued with a warning letter by the Company dated for not performing, and followed by a Disciplinary Letter via e- mail dated to the Claimant asking for an explanation for being late for the Company training sessions. 15

16 44. The Claimant contends that her dismissal was unfair and was not bona fide. The Claimant claimed that the Company when decided not to confirm her did so without justification and was tainted by mala fide intentions. The Claimant however did not adduce any evidence on the alleged mala fide actions of the Company for not confirming her and also any evidence to suggest that the Company was not fair when it conducted the assessment on her. 45. It was evident to the Court that the Company had taken all the necessary steps and had followed the process and procedures stipulated in assessing the Claimant during the probation period by conducting Performance Review and Development evaluation during her probationary period. 46. The Court is of the view that the Company could had terminated the Claimant s contract at the end of her 6 month probationary period but the Company did not do so. The Claimant had indeed been given a fair opportunity to prove herself and measure up to the Company's expectations, but she failed to avail herself of the opportunity. The probation period had been extended but the Claimant failed to show improvement of her performance up to the expectation of the Company. 47. Beside not being able to achieve the sales targets set by the Company, the Claimant also failed in demonstrating her suitability in relation to the job she was employed for by the Company. The issuance of 16

17 show cause and warning letters against her during her extended probation period reflected her lack of discipline and fitness for the post. 48. The Claimant does not possessed the right skill, competence, attitude and suitability which will entitle her to transcend from being an employee on probation to that of a confirmed permanent employee. 49. The Court is satisfied that the termination by the Company was a bone fide exercise of the power conferred by the contract. Therefore the Company is entitled to remove the Claimant since the Claimant failed to measure up to the Company s expectation. 50. In the case of SITT TATT BHD V. ONG CHEE MENG [2004] 2 ILR 388 at page 393 when the learned Chairman stated: In my view the company was fully entitled to terminate the claimant s service if upon their evaluation, the claimant was found to have been unable to perform his job functions satisfactorily. How he is to be assessed and the yardstick to be used to gauge his performance is best left to the company s prerogative and judgment so long as it is not tainted by mala fide intentions. It could well be based on performance per se or upon a combination of other variables and values such as suitability, aptitude, conduct, behaviour, mannerism and so forth. Its categories are never exhaustive. After all it is well settled that the company is entitled to organize its business in the manner it considers best. It is the duty of the claimant to measure up to the company s expectation. All the more so as the claimant was still under probation. 17

18 51. Premised upon the findings of this Court and having regards to the evidence in its totality, the Court is of the view that the Company has proved on a balance of probability that the Claimants' termination was justified and it was carried out in good faith and in accordance to fair labour practice. 52. The also Court finds that the Company has proved on a balance of probabilities that the Claimant had not been able to perform and she was also not suitable to be employed as a permanent employee of the Company. 53. Based on equity and good conscience and the substantial merit of the case without regard to technicality and legal form legal form under section 30 (5) of the Act, the Court finds that the Claimants' termination was carried out with just cause and excuse. The Claimant s claim is hereby dismissed. HANDED DOWN AND DATED THIS 28 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017 (REIHANA BTE ABD.RAZAK) CHAIRMAN INDUSTRIAL COURT, MALAYSIA KUALA LUMPUR 18

LEE PEI SZE v. SWIFTLET GARDEN SDN BHD

LEE PEI SZE v. SWIFTLET GARDEN SDN BHD 482 LEE PEI SZE v. SWIFTLET GARDEN SDN BHD Industrial Court, Johor Duncan Sikodol Award No: 167 of 2017 [Case No: 16/4-664/16] 23 January 2017 Dismissal: Probationer Pleadings Allegations of misconduct

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. 4(23)/4-772/13 BETWEEN KAMAL AZIZUL BIN AZIZ AND AMBANK (M) BERHAD AWARD NO : 475 OF 2017

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. 4(23)/4-772/13 BETWEEN KAMAL AZIZUL BIN AZIZ AND AMBANK (M) BERHAD AWARD NO : 475 OF 2017 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. 4(23)/4-772/13 BETWEEN KAMAL AZIZUL BIN AZIZ AND AMBANK (M) BERHAD AWARD NO : 475 OF 2017 BEFORE: VENUE: Y.A. PUAN SAROJINI A/P KANDASAMY Chairman (Sitting alone)

More information

AWARD NO. : 1614 OF 2018

AWARD NO. : 1614 OF 2018 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. : BETWEEN NAZREEN BEGUM BINTI MOHAMED YAACOB AND PETRONAS / PETRONAS CHEMICALS GROUP BERHAD AWARD NO. : 1614 OF 2018 Before Venue : PUAN ANNA NG FUI CHOO - Chairman

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 2/4-346/15 BETWEEN MOHAMED HASLAM BIN ABDUL RAZAK AND PERUSAHAAN OTOMOBIL NASIONAL SDN BHD

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 2/4-346/15 BETWEEN MOHAMED HASLAM BIN ABDUL RAZAK AND PERUSAHAAN OTOMOBIL NASIONAL SDN BHD INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 2/4-346/15 BETWEEN MOHAMED HASLAM BIN ABDUL RAZAK AND PERUSAHAAN OTOMOBIL NASIONAL SDN BHD AWARD NO. 552 OF 2018 Before : Y.A. PUAN ROSENANI BINTI ABD RAHMAN - Chairman

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 18/4-352/2008 TEOH CHYE LYN ALLSTAFF OUTSOURCING SDN. BHD. AWARD NO: 577 OF 2010

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 18/4-352/2008 TEOH CHYE LYN ALLSTAFF OUTSOURCING SDN. BHD. AWARD NO: 577 OF 2010 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 18/4-352/2008 TEOH CHYE LYN V. ALLSTAFF OUTSOURCING SDN. BHD. AWARD NO: 577 OF 2010 Before : Y.A. RAJENDRAN NAYAGAM CHAIRMAN (Sitting Alone) Venue : Industrial Court

More information

ABDUL AZIZ ISMAIL & ORS v. ROYAL SELANGOR CLUB

ABDUL AZIZ ISMAIL & ORS v. ROYAL SELANGOR CLUB Abdul Aziz Ismail & Ors [2015] 2 MELR v. Royal Selangor Club 325 ABDUL AZIZ ISMAIL & ORS v. ROYAL SELANGOR CLUB Industrial Court, Kuala Lumpur Eddie Yeo Soon Chye Award No: 327 of 2015 [Case No: 13(25)(22)(25)/4-1255/2011]

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-173/02 BETWEEN MALAYSIAN AIRLINE SYSTEM BHD. AND KARTHIGESU A/L V. CHINNASAMY AWARD NO : 2230 OF 2005

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-173/02 BETWEEN MALAYSIAN AIRLINE SYSTEM BHD. AND KARTHIGESU A/L V. CHINNASAMY AWARD NO : 2230 OF 2005 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-173/02 BETWEEN MALAYSIAN AIRLINE SYSTEM BHD. AND KARTHIGESU A/L V. CHINNASAMY AWARD NO : 2230 OF 2005 Before : N. RAJASEGARAN - Chairman (Sitting Alone) Venue:

More information

AWARD NO. : 1089 OF 2016

AWARD NO. : 1089 OF 2016 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. : 3/4-106/15 BETWEEN INTAN SOFIA BINTI ZAINUDDIN AND TOI TOI SERVICES SDN. BHD. AWARD NO. : 1089 OF 2016 Before Venue : PUAN ANNA NG FUI CHOO - Chairman (Sitting Alone)

More information

ADAM ABDULLAH v. MALAYSIAN OXYGEN BHD

ADAM ABDULLAH v. MALAYSIAN OXYGEN BHD 353 ADAM ABDULLAH v. MALAYSIAN OXYGEN BHD Industrial Court, Kuala Lumpur Mary Shakila G Azariah Award No: 521 of 2012 [Case No: 24/4-906/10] 24 April 2012 Dismissal: Retrenchment - Redundancy - Company

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. : 1/1-8/18 BETWEEN NATIONAL UNION OF HOTEL, BAR & RESTAURANT WORKERS, PENINSULAR MALAYSIA AND

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. : 1/1-8/18 BETWEEN NATIONAL UNION OF HOTEL, BAR & RESTAURANT WORKERS, PENINSULAR MALAYSIA AND INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. : 1/1-8/18 BETWEEN NATIONAL UNION OF HOTEL, BAR & RESTAURANT WORKERS, PENINSULAR MALAYSIA AND ALOR SETAR HOLIDAY VILLA SDN. BHD. AWARD NO. : 1375 OF 2018 CORAM: YA

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. 4/4-1264/12 BETWEEN JUSTIN MAURICE READ AND PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD (PETRONAS) AWARD NO : 965 OF 2017

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. 4/4-1264/12 BETWEEN JUSTIN MAURICE READ AND PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD (PETRONAS) AWARD NO : 965 OF 2017 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. 4/4-1264/12 BETWEEN JUSTIN MAURICE READ AND PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD (PETRONAS) AWARD NO : 965 OF 2017 BEFORE : Y.A. PUAN SAROJINI A/P KANDASAMY Chairman (Sitting

More information

Managing Workplace Misconduct

Managing Workplace Misconduct Managing Workplace Misconduct What is Misconduct? BR Ghaiye: Misconduct is not a term of art If the conduct of an employee is of such a character that he is not regarded as worthy of employment it may

More information

THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. 5(1)/3 702/03 BETWEEN MAYBANK BERHAD AND ASSOCIATION OF MAYBANK CLASS ONE OFFICERS (AMCO)

THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. 5(1)/3 702/03 BETWEEN MAYBANK BERHAD AND ASSOCIATION OF MAYBANK CLASS ONE OFFICERS (AMCO) THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO. 5(1)/3 702/03 BETWEEN MAYBANK BERHAD AND ASSOCIATION OF MAYBANK CLASS ONE OFFICERS (AMCO) AWARD NO. 788 OF 2007 Before: TUAN CHEW SOO HO - CHAIRMAN YM. RAJA ALIZA

More information

THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 5/4-1546/05 BETWEEN ENCIK SAIFUL NAFIS BIN SHARIFF AND AIRASIA SDN BHD AWARD NO: 2239 OF 2007

THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 5/4-1546/05 BETWEEN ENCIK SAIFUL NAFIS BIN SHARIFF AND AIRASIA SDN BHD AWARD NO: 2239 OF 2007 THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 5/4-1546/05 BETWEEN ENCIK SAIFUL NAFIS BIN SHARIFF AND AIRASIA SDN BHD AWARD NO: 2239 OF 2007 Before : TUAN CHEW SOO HO - CHAIRMAN Venue : The Industrial Court

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL, MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) SITTING AT KUCHING, SARAWAK CIVIL APPEAL NO. Q /2013. Appellant YUNG ING ING

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL, MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) SITTING AT KUCHING, SARAWAK CIVIL APPEAL NO. Q /2013. Appellant YUNG ING ING IN THE COURT OF APPEAL, MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) SITTING AT KUCHING, SARAWAK CIVIL APPEAL NO. Q-02-2628-12/2013 Appellant YUNG ING ING v. Respondent HUNFARA CONSTRUCTION SDN. BHD. [In the matter

More information

IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 9/4-2260/06 BETWEEN KHOO EE PENG AND GALAXY AUTOMATION SDN BHD AWARD NO: 656 OF 2009

IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 9/4-2260/06 BETWEEN KHOO EE PENG AND GALAXY AUTOMATION SDN BHD AWARD NO: 656 OF 2009 IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 9/4-2260/06 BETWEEN KHOO EE PENG AND GALAXY AUTOMATION SDN BHD AWARD NO: 656 OF 2009 Before : MOHD AMIN FIRDAUS ABDULLAH - CHAIRMAN Venue : INDUSTRIAL COURT

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 18(12)/4-411/15 ZAKARIA BIN ISMAIL DAN EASTERN PACIFIC INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION BERHAD AWARD NO: 857 OF 2017

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 18(12)/4-411/15 ZAKARIA BIN ISMAIL DAN EASTERN PACIFIC INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION BERHAD AWARD NO: 857 OF 2017 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 18(12)/4-411/15 ZAKARIA BIN ISMAIL DAN EASTERN PACIFIC INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION BERHAD AWARD NO: 857 OF 2017 Before : Y.A. TUAN GULAM MUHIADDEEN BIN ABDUL AZIZ CHAIRMAN

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-864/02 BETWEEN MALAYSIAN WETLANDS FOUNDATION AND DEVENDIRAN S.T. MANI AWARD NO : 917 OF 2005

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-864/02 BETWEEN MALAYSIAN WETLANDS FOUNDATION AND DEVENDIRAN S.T. MANI AWARD NO : 917 OF 2005 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-864/02 BETWEEN MALAYSIAN WETLANDS FOUNDATION AND DEVENDIRAN S.T. MANI AWARD NO : 917 OF 2005 Before : N. RAJASEGARAN - Chairman (Sitting Alone) Venue : Industrial

More information

DATED DISCIPLINARY RULES AND PROCEDURE AND GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE

DATED DISCIPLINARY RULES AND PROCEDURE AND GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE DATED ------------ DISCIPLINARY RULES AND PROCEDURE AND GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 1 CONTENTS DISCIPLINARY RULES AND PROCEDURE 1. Policy statement...3 2. Who is covered by the procedure?...3 3. What is covered

More information

Batu Kemas Industri Sdn Bhd v Kerajaan Malaysia & Anor

Batu Kemas Industri Sdn Bhd v Kerajaan Malaysia & Anor Batu Kemas Industri Sdn Bhd v Kerajaan Malaysia & Anor Batu Kemas Industri Sdn Bhd v Kerajaan Malaysia & Anor COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA CIVIL APPEAL NO: A 01 16 01/2013 MOHD ZAWAWI SALLEH JCA, VERNON

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-166/02 BETWEEN BINA GOODYEAR BERHAD AND SUBRAMANIAM A/L KANAIAPPAN AWARD NO : 773 OF 2004

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-166/02 BETWEEN BINA GOODYEAR BERHAD AND SUBRAMANIAM A/L KANAIAPPAN AWARD NO : 773 OF 2004 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-166/02 BETWEEN BINA GOODYEAR BERHAD AND SUBRAMANIAM A/L KANAIAPPAN AWARD NO : 773 OF 2004 Before : N. RAJASEGARAN - Chairman (Sitting Alone) Venue: : Industrial

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA IN KUALA LUMPUR (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) IN THE FEDERAL TERRITORY OF KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA WRIT NO: 22IP-29-06/2015 BETWEEN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA IN KUALA LUMPUR (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) IN THE FEDERAL TERRITORY OF KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA WRIT NO: 22IP-29-06/2015 BETWEEN IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA IN KUALA LUMPUR (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) IN THE FEDERAL TERRITORY OF KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA WRIT NO: 22IP-29-06/2015 BETWEEN 1) WORLD GRAND DYNAMIC MARKETING SDN BHD (Company No

More information

MALAYSIA IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT KUCHING SUIT NO II BETWEEN AND

MALAYSIA IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT KUCHING SUIT NO II BETWEEN AND MALAYSIA IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT KUCHING SUIT NO. 22-74-08-II BETWEEN CMS ENERGY SDN BHD (Company No.34309-A) Level 6, Wisma Mahmud Jalan Sungai Sarawak 930 Kuching, Sarawak Plaintiff

More information

ATLAN HOLDINGS BHD. ( W) (Incorporated in Malaysia)

ATLAN HOLDINGS BHD. ( W) (Incorporated in Malaysia) Extract of Minutes of the Twenty-Eighth Annual General Meeting of the Company held at the Lily Room, 1st Floor, The Zon All Suites Residences On The Park, 161-D, Jalan Ampang, 50450 Kuala Lumpur on Wednesday,

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 25/4-278/06 ENCIK RAVINDAR SINGH A/L JESWANT SINGH AND ISLAND AIR SDN BHD AWARD NO: 175 OF 2009

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 25/4-278/06 ENCIK RAVINDAR SINGH A/L JESWANT SINGH AND ISLAND AIR SDN BHD AWARD NO: 175 OF 2009 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO: 25/4-278/06 ENCIK RAVINDAR SINGH A/L JESWANT SINGH AND ISLAND AIR SDN BHD AWARD NO: 175 OF 2009 BEFORE VENUE : DATO JALALDIN HJ. HUSSAIN CHAIRMAN (Sitting Alone) :

More information

JUDGMENT (Court enclosure no. 4)

JUDGMENT (Court enclosure no. 4) IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT KUALA LUMPUR (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) IN THE FEDERAL TERRITORY OF KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA CIVIL SUIT NO: WA-22IP-37-09/2017 BETWEEN DARUL FIKIR (Business Registration No.: 000624088-H)

More information

ANCOM LOGISTICS BERHAD (6614-W) (Incorporated in Malaysia)

ANCOM LOGISTICS BERHAD (6614-W) (Incorporated in Malaysia) (Incorporated in Malaysia) MINUTES OF THE 52 ND ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF THE COMPANY HELD AT SELANGOR BALLROOM 1, DORSETT GRAND SUBANG, JALAN SS12/1, 47500 SUBANG JAYA SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN ON THURSDAY,

More information

Disciplinary and Dismissal Procedure

Disciplinary and Dismissal Procedure Disciplinary and Dismissal Procedure [Company Name] Drafted by Solicitors Contents Clause 1. Policy statement... 1 2. Who is covered by the procedure?... 1 3. What is covered by the procedure?... 1 4.

More information

- and - United Steelworkers, Local 5442, - and - BEFORE: W.D. Hamilton, Chairperson

- and - United Steelworkers, Local 5442, - and - BEFORE: W.D. Hamilton, Chairperson Manitoba Labour Board Suite 500, 5 th Floor - 175 Hargrave Street Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3C 3R8 T 204 945-2089 F 204 945-1296 www.manitoba.ca/labour/labbrd DISMISSAL NO. 2056 IN THE MATTER OF: THE

More information

NYLEX (MALAYSIA) BERHAD (9378-T) (Incorporated in Malaysia)

NYLEX (MALAYSIA) BERHAD (9378-T) (Incorporated in Malaysia) (Incorporated in Malaysia) MINUTES OF THE 47TH ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF THE COMPANY HELD AT SELANGOR BALLROOM 1, DORSETT GRAND SUBANG, SS12/1, 47500 SUBANG JAYA, SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN, ON THURSDAY, 19

More information

CN ASIA CORPORATION BHD ( A)

CN ASIA CORPORATION BHD ( A) CN ASIA CORPORATION BHD (399442-A) MINUTES of the Twenty-First (21st) Annual General Meeting ( AGM ) of CN Asia Corporation Bhd ( Company ) held at the Meeting Room 1, Level UG, ibis Styles Kuala Lumpur

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D. 2005

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D. 2005 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D. 2005 CLAIM NO. 175 OF 2005 (ROMEL PALACIO ( BETWEEN (AND ( (BELIZE CITY COUNCIL CLAIMANT DEFENDANT Mr. Dean Lindo, SC, for the Claimant Mr. Edwin Flowers, SC, for the

More information

THE MAHARASHTRA EMPLOYEES OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS (CONDITIONS OF SERVICE) REGULATION ACT, [3 of 1978] 1. (Amended upto Mah.

THE MAHARASHTRA EMPLOYEES OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS (CONDITIONS OF SERVICE) REGULATION ACT, [3 of 1978] 1. (Amended upto Mah. THE MAHARASHTRA EMPLOYEES OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS (CONDITIONS OF SERVICE) REGULATION ACT, 1977 [3 of 1978] 1 (Amended upto Mah. 9 of 2012) [20th March, 1978] An Act to regulate recruitment and conditions of

More information

UNRWA DISPUTE TRIBUNAL

UNRWA DISPUTE TRIBUNAL UNRWA DISPUTE TRIBUNAL Case No.: UNRWA/DT/SFO/2008/14 Date: 26 July 2012 Original: English Before: Registry: Registrar: Judge Bana Barazi Amman Laurie McNabb ABU AL HASAN v. COMMISSIONER GENERAL OF THE

More information

IREKA CORPORATION BERHAD

IREKA CORPORATION BERHAD Page 1 of 7 IREKA CORPORATION BERHAD (Co. No. 25882A) (Incorporated in Malaysia) EXTRACT OF THE MINUTES OF THE FORTYFIRST ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF THE COMPANY HELD AT DEWAN BERJAYA, BUKIT KIARA EQUESTRIAN

More information

(Company No D) (Incorporated in Malaysia)

(Company No D) (Incorporated in Malaysia) (Company No. 132493-D) (Incorporated in Malaysia) SUMMARY RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING IN ACCORDANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 9.21(2) OF BURSA MALAYSIA MAIN MARKET LISTING REQUIREMENTS

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-170/02 BETWEEN SEMANGAT RAKYAT SDN. BHD. AND

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-170/02 BETWEEN SEMANGAT RAKYAT SDN. BHD. AND INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-170/02 BETWEEN SEMANGAT RAKYAT SDN. BHD. AND JESUMARAN ANTHONY A/L J. MARIADASS @ MUHAMAD ADAM JESU ABDULLAH AWARD NO : 766 OF 2004 Before : N. RAJASEGARAN -

More information

Wong Kian Wah v Ng Kien Boon

Wong Kian Wah v Ng Kien Boon IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MALAYSIA Coram: Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, JCA; Abdul Rahman Sebli, JCA; Mary Lim, JCA Wong Kian Wah v Ng Kien Boon Citation: [2018] MYCA 230 Suit Number: Civil Appeal No. W 02(NCVC)(W)

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.235/2000 % Date of decision: 3 rd March, 2010 DULI CHAND Through:... Petitioner Mr. Pravin Sharma, Advocate. versus P.O.LABOUR COURT-VIII & ANR. Through:

More information

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO: 01(i)-15-04/2014(C) BETWEEN SERUAN GEMILANG MAKMUR SDN BHD AND SUMMARY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO: 01(i)-15-04/2014(C) BETWEEN SERUAN GEMILANG MAKMUR SDN BHD AND SUMMARY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF MALAYSIA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO: 01(i)-15-04/2014(C) BETWEEN SERUAN GEMILANG MAKMUR SDN BHD.. APPELLANT AND 1. KERAJAAN NEGERI PAHANG DARUL MAKMUR 2. PENGARAH

More information

DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHERS NOTES OF GUIDANCE FOR RELEVANT BODIES

DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHERS NOTES OF GUIDANCE FOR RELEVANT BODIES DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHERS NOTES OF GUIDANCE FOR RELEVANT BODIES 1. Advice and Guidance 1.1 It is strongly recommended that the advice and guidance of the Employing Authority be sought when any

More information

PETRONAS DAGANGAN BERHAD (Incorporated in Malaysia)

PETRONAS DAGANGAN BERHAD (Incorporated in Malaysia) PETRONAS DAGANGAN BERHAD (Incorporated in Malaysia) THIRTY-FOURTH (34 TH ) ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING Minutes of the Thirty-Fourth (34 th ) Annual General Meeting of PETRONAS Dagangan Berhad held at Sapphire

More information

ATLAN HOLDINGS BHD. ( W) (Incorporated in Malaysia)

ATLAN HOLDINGS BHD. ( W) (Incorporated in Malaysia) Extract of Minutes of the Twenty-Ninth Annual General Meeting of the Company held at the Meeting Room, Wisma Atlan, 8 Persiaran Kampung Jawa, 11900 Bayan Lepas, Penang on Tuesday, 28 August 2018 at 11:00

More information

THE ROLE, FUNCTIONS AND POWERS OF THE INDUSTRIAL COURT IN RELATION TO RETRENCHMENT, TERMINATION AND DISMISSAL TREVOR GEORGE DE SILVA 14TH JANUARY 2009

THE ROLE, FUNCTIONS AND POWERS OF THE INDUSTRIAL COURT IN RELATION TO RETRENCHMENT, TERMINATION AND DISMISSAL TREVOR GEORGE DE SILVA 14TH JANUARY 2009 THE ROLE, FUNCTIONS AND POWERS OF THE INDUSTRIAL COURT IN RELATION TO RETRENCHMENT, TERMINATION AND DISMISSAL TREVOR GEORGE DE SILVA 14TH JANUARY 2009 JW MARRIOT 1 The long title of the Industrial Relations

More information

DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHERS NOTES OF GUIDANCE FOR RELEVANT BODIES

DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHERS NOTES OF GUIDANCE FOR RELEVANT BODIES DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHERS NOTES OF GUIDANCE FOR RELEVANT BODIES 1. Advice and Guidance 1.1 It is strongly recommended that the advice and guidance of the Employing Authority be sought when any

More information

MALAYSIA IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT FEDERAL TERRITORY, LABUAN. CIVIL CASE NO: LBN-24NCvC-6/ BETWEEN SEJATI SDN. BHD..

MALAYSIA IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT FEDERAL TERRITORY, LABUAN. CIVIL CASE NO: LBN-24NCvC-6/ BETWEEN SEJATI SDN. BHD.. MALAYSIA IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT FEDERAL TERRITORY, LABUAN CIVIL CASE NO: LBN-24NCvC-6/8-2016 BETWEEN SEJATI SDN. BHD.. PLAINTIFF AND DIRECTOR OF LANDS AND SURVEYS.. 1 ST DEFENDANT SABAH

More information

Rules for Disciplinary Procedures Season 2017

Rules for Disciplinary Procedures Season 2017 Rules for Disciplinary Procedures Season 2017 (As at 17 th Feb 2017) 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS... 3 1.1 JURISDICTION... 4 1.2 POWERS OF ADJOURNMENT AND ATTENDANCE OF CITED PARTY.. 4 1.3 POWERS OF COMMITTEES..

More information

VIGIL MECHANISM / WHISTLE BLOWER POLICY OF AMTEK AUTO LIMITED (Company)

VIGIL MECHANISM / WHISTLE BLOWER POLICY OF AMTEK AUTO LIMITED (Company) VIGIL MECHANISM / WHISTLE BLOWER POLICY OF AMTEK AUTO LIMITED (Company) 1. PREMBLE 1.1. Section 177 of the Companies Act, 2013 requires every listed company to establish a vigil mechanism for the directors

More information

AGREEMENT FOR KIB KENANGA AGENCY NETWORK SERVICE

AGREEMENT FOR KIB KENANGA AGENCY NETWORK SERVICE Kenanga Investors Berhad (Co. No. 353563-P) Suite 12.02, 12th Floor Kenanga International Jalan Sultan Ismail 50250 Kuala Lumpur Tel No. : 03-2057 3688 Fax No. : 03-2126 8807 Toll Free: 1-800-88-3737 AGREEMENT

More information

JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE PILLAY ON 18 AUGUST Instructed by

JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE PILLAY ON 18 AUGUST Instructed by IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA SITTING IN DURBAN REPORTABLE CASE NO D218/03 DATE HEARD: 2003/08/08 2003/08/18 DATE DELIVERED: In the matter between: HOSPERSA MOULTRIE First Applicant Second Applicant

More information

BETWEEN. LAI CHENG OOI (f) (the executrix of the estate of Lee Tain Lee Thien Chiung, deceased) AND

BETWEEN. LAI CHENG OOI (f) (the executrix of the estate of Lee Tain Lee Thien Chiung, deceased) AND IN THE COURT OF APPEAL, MALAYSIA AT PUTRAJAYA (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL APPEAL NO. S-01(IM)(NCVC)-145-04/2016 [Kota Kinabalu High Court OS No. BKI-24NCVC-44/5-2015] BETWEEN LAI CHENG OOI (f) (the

More information

BERMUDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REGULATIONS 2001 BR 81 / 2001

BERMUDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REGULATIONS 2001 BR 81 / 2001 QUO FA T A F U E R N T BERMUDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REGULATIONS 2001 BR 81 / 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 1A 2 3 4 5 5A 6 6A 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Citation and commencement Purpose Interpretation

More information

DOMESTIC ENQUIRY NEED FOR DOMESTIC ENQUIRY

DOMESTIC ENQUIRY NEED FOR DOMESTIC ENQUIRY DOMESTIC ENQUIRY NEED FOR DOMESTIC ENQUIRY For the smooth functioning of an industry, the defined codes of discipline, contracts of service by awards, agreements and standing orders must be adhered to.

More information

ESSENTIALS OF EMPLOYMENT LAW MALAYSIA & ASIA Topic: MALAYSIAN EMPLOYMENT & INDUSTRIAL LAW : BRIEF OVERVIEW AND SPECIFIC INSIGHTS

ESSENTIALS OF EMPLOYMENT LAW MALAYSIA & ASIA Topic: MALAYSIAN EMPLOYMENT & INDUSTRIAL LAW : BRIEF OVERVIEW AND SPECIFIC INSIGHTS ESSENTIALS OF EMPLOYMENT LAW MALAYSIA & ASIA 2008 Topic: MALAYSIAN EMPLOYMENT & INDUSTRIAL LAW : BRIEF OVERVIEW AND SPECIFIC INSIGHTS 2008 All Rights Reserved. Trevor George De Silva. 1 Malaysian Employment

More information

THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT. MICHAEL KAWALYA-KAGWA Applicant

THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT. MICHAEL KAWALYA-KAGWA Applicant THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT Not reportable Case no: J 2406/16 In the matter between: MICHAEL KAWALYA-KAGWA Applicant and DEVELOPMENT BANK OF SOUTHERN AFRICA Respondent Heard:

More information

BRIGHT PACKAGING INDUSTRY BERHAD

BRIGHT PACKAGING INDUSTRY BERHAD THIS CIRCULAR IS IMPORTANT AND REQUIRES YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION. If you are in any doubt as to the course of action to be taken, you should consult your stockbroker, bank manager, solicitor, accountant

More information

Galaxon. Disciplinary Policy and Dismissal Procedures. Page 1 of 8 Date:

Galaxon. Disciplinary Policy and Dismissal Procedures. Page 1 of 8 Date: Revision: 2 Page 1 of 8 Date: 01-08-13 INTRODUCTION 1. It is necessary to have a minimum number of rules in the interests of the whole organisation. 2. The rules set standards of performance and behaviour

More information

March IR Law Free Newsletter. IR Law provides the following advisory/consultation services to Members and Non-Members*: Disciplinary proceedings

March IR Law Free Newsletter. IR Law provides the following advisory/consultation services to Members and Non-Members*: Disciplinary proceedings IRLaw CORPORATE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS CONSULTANCY Dear Readers, This is our Free Newsletter, examining some updates on the new Public Holiday for Sarawak, Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) and our usual

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/1-154/02 BETWEEN AMPAC MARKETING SDN. BHD. AND. JULIUS A/L J. ANTHONYSAMY (deceased) AWARD NO : 40 OF 2006

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/1-154/02 BETWEEN AMPAC MARKETING SDN. BHD. AND. JULIUS A/L J. ANTHONYSAMY (deceased) AWARD NO : 40 OF 2006 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/1-154/02 BETWEEN AMPAC MARKETING SDN. BHD. AND JULIUS A/L J. ANTHONYSAMY (deceased) AWARD NO : 40 OF 2006 Before : N. RAJASEGARAN - CHAIRMAN LIM WENG KHUAN - EMPLOYERS

More information

CHEMICAL COMPANY OF MALAYSIA BERHAD (5136-T)

CHEMICAL COMPANY OF MALAYSIA BERHAD (5136-T) CHEMICAL COMPANY OF MALAYSIA BERHAD (5136-T) (Incorporated in Malaysia) SUMMARY OF THE 55 th ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING HELD AT JUNIOR BALLROOM, INTERCONTINENTAL KUALA LUMPUR, 165 JALAN AMPANG, 50450 KUALA

More information

MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI SHAH ALAM DALAM NEGERI SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN GUAMAN SIVIL NO: 22C-20-09/2014 ANTARA PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN NEGERI SELANGOR DAN

MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI SHAH ALAM DALAM NEGERI SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN GUAMAN SIVIL NO: 22C-20-09/2014 ANTARA PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN NEGERI SELANGOR DAN MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI SHAH ALAM DALAM NEGERI SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN GUAMAN SIVIL NO: 22C--09/14 ANTARA PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN NEGERI SELANGOR PLAINTIF DAN 1. PROJEK LEBUHRAYA USAHASAMA BERHAD (No. Syarikat

More information

Albon (t/a NA Carriage Co) v Naza Motor Trading Sdn Bhd (No 4) [2007] APP.L.R. 07/31

Albon (t/a NA Carriage Co) v Naza Motor Trading Sdn Bhd (No 4) [2007] APP.L.R. 07/31 JUDGMENT : Mr Justice Lightman: Chancery Division. 31 st July 2007 INTRODUCTION 1. I have given a series of judgments on interlocutory applications in this action. The action relates to the business dealings

More information

NINETY-SEVENTH SESSION. Considering that the facts of the case and the pleadings may be summed up as follows:

NINETY-SEVENTH SESSION. Considering that the facts of the case and the pleadings may be summed up as follows: NINETY-SEVENTH SESSION Judgment No. 2324 The Administrative Tribunal, Considering the complaint filed by Mrs E. C. against the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) on 5 March 2003

More information

IN THE COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DR JOSEPHINE OJIAMBO THE COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT

IN THE COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DR JOSEPHINE OJIAMBO THE COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT CSAT APL/41 IN THE COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF DR JOSEPHINE OJIAMBO APPLICANT and THE COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT RESPONDENT Before the Tribunal constituted by Mr David Goddard

More information

CHESTER-LE-STREET GOLF CLUB DISCIPLINARY POLICY AND PROCEDURE

CHESTER-LE-STREET GOLF CLUB DISCIPLINARY POLICY AND PROCEDURE CHESTER-LE-STREET GOLF CLUB DISCIPLINARY POLICY AND PROCEDURE In keeping with Chester-le Street Golf Club s other policies and procedures, this document is issued for guidance and is not intended to have

More information

DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUSASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO: W

DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUSASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO: W DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANGKUSASA RAYUAN) RAYUAN SIVIL NO: W-02-2133-2011 ANTARA BOUNTY DYNAMICS SDN BHD (dahulunya dikenali sebagai MEDA DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD) PERAYU DAN CHOW TAT MING DAN 175

More information

GENETEC TECHNOLOGY BERHAD ( W) (Incorporated in Malaysia)

GENETEC TECHNOLOGY BERHAD ( W) (Incorporated in Malaysia) GENETEC TECHNOLOGY BERHAD (445537-W) (Incorporated in Malaysia) MINUTES OF THE 20 th ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING (the AGM or Meeting ) Venue : Multi-Purpose Hall, 2nd Floor, Lot 5, Jalan P10/12, Kawasan Perusahaan

More information

AJIYA BERHAD ( W) (Incorporated in Malaysia)

AJIYA BERHAD ( W) (Incorporated in Malaysia) AJIYA BERHAD (377627-W) (Incorporated in Malaysia) MINUTES OF THE TWENTY-SECOND ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF AJIYA BERHAD HELD AT VIP HOTEL, BATU 1, JALAN BULOH KASAP, 85000 SEGAMAT, JOHOR ON FRIDAY, 27 APRIL

More information

Police Service Act 2009

Police Service Act 2009 Police Service Act 2009 SAMOA POLICE SERVICE ACT 2009 Arrangement of Provisions PART 1 PRELIMINARY 1. Short title and commencement 2. Interpretation PART 2 THE SAMOA POLICESERVICE 3. Continuation of the

More information

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG ELIZABETH MATLAKALA BODIBE

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG ELIZABETH MATLAKALA BODIBE IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Not Reportable Case no: JR 490/15 In the matter between: ELIZABETH MATLAKALA BODIBE Applicant and PUBLIC SERVICE CO-ORDINATING BARGAINING COUNCIL DANIEL

More information

Jayasinghe V. The Attorney General And Others file:///c:/documents and Settings/kapilan/My Documents/Google Talk...

Jayasinghe V. The Attorney General And Others file:///c:/documents and Settings/kapilan/My Documents/Google Talk... 1 of 9 4/19/2011 3:18 PM JAYASINGHE v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OTHERS 74 SUPREME COURT. FERNANDO, J. PERERA, J. AND WIJETUNGA, J. S.C. APPLICATION N0. 86/94 OCTOBER 3, 1994. Fundamental Rights Prolonged

More information

110th Session Judgment No. 2991

110th Session Judgment No. 2991 Organisation internationale du Travail Tribunal administratif International Labour Organization Administrative Tribunal Registry s translation, the French text alone being authoritative. 110th Session

More information

NOTICE OF 20TH ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING

NOTICE OF 20TH ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING ANNUAL REPORT 2016 NOTICE OF 20TH ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Twentieth (20th) Annual General Meeting ( AGM ) of the Company will be held at Hazel & Ivy Room, Level 2M, One World

More information

BERMAZ AUTO BERHAD (Formerly Known As Berjaya Auto Berhad) (Company No: M) (Incorporated in Malaysia)

BERMAZ AUTO BERHAD (Formerly Known As Berjaya Auto Berhad) (Company No: M) (Incorporated in Malaysia) BERMAZ AUTO BERHAD (Formerly Known As Berjaya Auto Berhad) (Company No: 900557-M) (Incorporated in Malaysia) An Extract of Minutes of the Extraordinary General Meeting of the Company held at Perdana Ballroom,

More information

ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. as amended by

ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. as amended by (GG 2996) Part II brought into force on 20 June 2003; remainder of Act brought into force on 30 June 2003, with both dates being announced in GN 125/2003 (GG 3001) as amended by Magistrates Amendment Act

More information

For the appellants Lim Kian Leong (Tony Ng TT, Keith Kwan & Rachel Tan Pak Theen with him); M/s Mohd Zain & Co

For the appellants Lim Kian Leong (Tony Ng TT, Keith Kwan & Rachel Tan Pak Theen with him); M/s Mohd Zain & Co NGAN & NGAN HOLDINGS SDN BHD & ANOR v. CENTRAL MERCANTILE CORPORATION (M) SDN BHD [2010] 3 CLJ 818 COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA HELILIAH MOHD YUSOF JCA, KN SEGARA JCA, RAMLY ALI JCA [CIVIL APPEAL NO: W-02-85-2007]

More information

KIA LIM BERHAD ( P) (Incorporated in Malaysia)

KIA LIM BERHAD ( P) (Incorporated in Malaysia) KIA LIM BERHAD (342868-P) (Incorporated in Malaysia) MINUTES OF THE TWENTY-SECOND ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF KIA LIM BERHAD HELD AT THE KATERINA HOTEL, 8, JALAN ZABEDAH, 83000 BATU PAHAT, JOHOR DARUL TAKZIM

More information

ADANI POWER LIMITED VIGIL MECHANISM / WHISTLE BLOWER POLICY

ADANI POWER LIMITED VIGIL MECHANISM / WHISTLE BLOWER POLICY ADANI POWER LIMITED VIGIL MECHANISM / WHISTLE BLOWER POLICY (Approved on 6 th August, 2014; Amended on 3 rd May, 2016, Amended on 11 th November, 2017) Page 1 of 8 1. PREFACE Adani Power Limited (herein

More information

MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY (Department of Commerce) (As up to date.) THE COFFEE BOARD SERVANTS (CLASSIFICATION, CONTROL AND APPEAL) RULES, 1967

MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY (Department of Commerce) (As up to date.) THE COFFEE BOARD SERVANTS (CLASSIFICATION, CONTROL AND APPEAL) RULES, 1967 MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY (Department of Commerce) (As up to date.) 0 0 0 THE COFFEE BOARD SERVANTS (CLASSIFICATION, CONTROL AND APPEAL) RULES, 1967 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule

More information

IN THE SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY (SADC) TRIBUNAL WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA BOOKIE MONICA KETHUSEGILE-JURU

IN THE SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY (SADC) TRIBUNAL WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA BOOKIE MONICA KETHUSEGILE-JURU IN THE SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY (SADC) TRIBUNAL WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA CASE NO. SADC (T) 02/2009 IN THE MATTER BETWEEN BOOKIE MONICA KETHUSEGILE-JURU APPLICANT AND THE SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT

More information

SMALL CLAIMS COURT ACT

SMALL CLAIMS COURT ACT LAWS OF KENYA SMALL CLAIMS COURT ACT NO. 2 OF 2016 Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org Small Claims Court No. 2 of 2016 Section

More information

Country Code: MS 2002 Rev. CAP Reference: 19/1979. Date of entry into force: April 1, 1980 (SRO 8/1980)

Country Code: MS 2002 Rev. CAP Reference: 19/1979. Date of entry into force: April 1, 1980 (SRO 8/1980) Country Code: MS 2002 Rev. CAP. 15.03 Title: Country: EMPLOYMENT ACT MONTSERRAT Reference: 19/1979 Date of entry into force: April 1, 1980 (SRO 8/1980) Date of Amendment: 5/1986; 10/1989; 5/1996 Subject:

More information

TENDER DOCUMENT FOR RECEPTIONIST REGIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY,BHOPAL

TENDER DOCUMENT FOR RECEPTIONIST REGIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY,BHOPAL TENDER DOCUMENT FOR RECEPTIONIST REGIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY,BHOPAL Government of India Regional Museum of Natural History (Ministry of Environment forests & Climate Change) E-5, Arera Colony, Bhopal-462016

More information

DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHERS INCLUDING PRINCIPALS AND VICE-PRINCIPALS IN GRANT-AIDED SCHOOLS WITH FULLY DELEGATED BUDGETS

DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHERS INCLUDING PRINCIPALS AND VICE-PRINCIPALS IN GRANT-AIDED SCHOOLS WITH FULLY DELEGATED BUDGETS DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE FOR TEACHERS INCLUDING PRINCIPALS AND VICE-PRINCIPALS IN GRANT-AIDED SCHOOLS WITH FULLY DELEGATED BUDGETS 1. PURPOSE AND PRINCIPLES 1.1 This procedure has been drawn up to provide

More information

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-3029/04 BETWEEN TETUAN B. S. SIDHU & CO. AND SHAMSIAH BINTI ASRI AWARD NO : 227 OF 2006

INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-3029/04 BETWEEN TETUAN B. S. SIDHU & CO. AND SHAMSIAH BINTI ASRI AWARD NO : 227 OF 2006 INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MALAYSIA CASE NO : 15/4-3029/04 BETWEEN TETUAN B. S. SIDHU & CO. AND SHAMSIAH BINTI ASRI AWARD NO : 227 OF 2006 Before : N. RAJASEGARAN - CHAIRMAN (Sitting Alone) Venue : Industrial

More information

[1] This is an appeal, brought with leave granted by the court a quo

[1] This is an appeal, brought with leave granted by the court a quo Republic of South Africa In the High Court of South Africa Western Cape High Court, Cape Town CASE NO: A228/2009 MINISTER OF SAFETY & SECURITY SUPERINTENDENT NOEL GRAHAM ZEEMAN PAUL CHRISTIAAN LOUW N.O.

More information

Revision : 0 Date : GENT Exco Approval (27 April 2012) Whistleblower Policy

Revision : 0 Date : GENT Exco Approval (27 April 2012) Whistleblower Policy Revision : 0 Date : GENT Exco Approval (27 April 2012) Whistleblower Policy TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Overview and Policy Statement.... 1 2. Glossary of Definitions...1-2 3. The Whistleblower Committee - Terms

More information

UNITED NATIONS APPEALS TRIBUNAL TRIBUNAL D APPEL DES NATIONS UNIES

UNITED NATIONS APPEALS TRIBUNAL TRIBUNAL D APPEL DES NATIONS UNIES UNITED NATIONS APPEALS TRIBUNAL TRIBUNAL D APPEL DES NATIONS UNIES Case No. 2010-155 Ahmed (Appellant) v. Secretary-General of the United Nations (Respondent) JUDGMENT Before: Judgment No.: Judge Sophia

More information

SAINT CHRISTOPHER AND NEVIS No. 19 of 2011

SAINT CHRISTOPHER AND NEVIS No. 19 of 2011 1 No. 19 of 2011. Public Service Act, 2011. 19. Saint Christopher and Nevis. I assent, LS CUTHBERT M SEBASTIAN Governor-General. 20 th July, 2011. SAINT CHRISTOPHER AND NEVIS No. 19 of 2011 AN ACT to provide

More information

35 of 207 DOCUMENTS LexisNexis Asia (a division of Reed Elsevier (S) Pte Ltd) The Malayan Law Journal Articles.

35 of 207 DOCUMENTS LexisNexis Asia (a division of Reed Elsevier (S) Pte Ltd) The Malayan Law Journal Articles. Page 1 35 of 207 DOCUMENTS 2003 LexisNexis Asia (a division of Reed Elsevier (S) Pte Ltd) The Malayan Law Journal Articles 2007 Volume 5 [2007] 5 MLJ cclxxxiv; [2007] 5 MLJA 284 LENGTH: 11417 words TITLE:

More information

C. v. CERN. 122nd Session Judgment No. 3678

C. v. CERN. 122nd Session Judgment No. 3678 Organisation internationale du Travail Tribunal administratif International Labour Organization Administrative Tribunal Registry s translation, the French text alone being authoritative. C. v. CERN 122nd

More information

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG BOSAL AFRIKA (PTY) LTD

IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG BOSAL AFRIKA (PTY) LTD IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Reportable In the matter between: Case no: JR 839/2011 BOSAL AFRIKA (PTY) LTD Applicant and NUMSA obo ITUMELENG MAWELELA First Respondent ADVOCATE PC PIO

More information

SEVENTY-SEVENTH SESSION

SEVENTY-SEVENTH SESSION Registry's translation, the French text alone being authoritative. SEVENTY-SEVENTH SESSION In re DEMONET Judgment 1346 THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, Considering the complaint filed by Mr. Jacques Denis

More information

The Uttar Pradesh Judicial Service Rules, 2001

The Uttar Pradesh Judicial Service Rules, 2001 The Uttar Pradesh Judicial Service Rules, 2001 In pursuance of the provisions of Clause (3) of Article 348 of the Constitution, the Governor is pleased to order the publication of the following English

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT KUALA LUMPUR COMMERCIAL DIVISION CIVIL SUIT NO: D-22NCC BETWEEN AND (ORIGINAL ACTION) AND BETWEEN AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT KUALA LUMPUR COMMERCIAL DIVISION CIVIL SUIT NO: D-22NCC BETWEEN AND (ORIGINAL ACTION) AND BETWEEN AND 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT KUALA LUMPUR COMMERCIAL DIVISION CIVIL SUIT NO: D-22NCC-1017-2010 BETWEEN FSBM CTECH SDN. BHD....PLAINTIFF AND TECHNITIUM SDN. BHD....DEFENDANT (ORIGINAL ACTION) AND BETWEEN

More information

GUIDELINES FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION

GUIDELINES FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION MALAYSIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MULTIMEDIA COMMISSION GUIDELINES FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION JULY 2003 Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission Level 11, Menara Dato Onn PWTC, Jalan Tun Ismail 50480

More information

Notice 0f Annual General Meeting

Notice 0f Annual General Meeting NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the 49 th Annual General Meeting of the Company will be held at Concorde Ballroom 1, Lobby Level, Concorde Hotel, Jalan Sultan Ismail, 50250 Kuala Lumpur on Friday, 21 April

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO FIRST NAMED DEFENDANT AND AND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO FIRST NAMED DEFENDANT AND AND THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2016-01420 BETWEEN RICKY PANDOHEE CLAIMANT AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO FIRST NAMED DEFENDANT AND THE PRESIDENT,

More information

POLICE ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. PART I Introduction and Interpretation

POLICE ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. PART I Introduction and Interpretation POLICE ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I Introduction and Interpretation SECTION 1. Short title 2. Interpretation PART 11 Constitution and Administration 3. Constitution of the Force 4. Commissioner 5.

More information

ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL. Decision No. 111 (28 February 2018) v. Asian Development Bank (No. 3)

ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL. Decision No. 111 (28 February 2018) v. Asian Development Bank (No. 3) ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Decision No. 111 Ms. D (28 February 2018) v. Asian Development Bank (No. 3) Lakshmi Swaminathan, President Gillian Triggs, Vice-President Anne Trebilcock

More information